i'm with you real man. I think it looks ace. Not pretty by any stretch but neither was the countach or the stealth fighter or a helicopter gunship. You get my drift, it's menacing - I reckon it has guns and everything (that may justify the cost).

just a thought: carbon fibre fishing rods flex a lot more than a bike frame does, and they last ages...

True but they bend rather than take stresses and impacts from different angles + not many are used to catch fish 70kgs and above! I'm sure the engineers/designers have done their homework and it will be fine.

nickc - Top end is top end, doesn't mean the public will actually buy such bikes. The only reason why high end race machines as above are available is that a UCI rule was introduced to stop 'pro only' stuff, no irony at all as far as I can see.

It's highly interesting to see such developments, despite the cost.

If you have a spare £100,000 + you can even buy a bike like Chris Hoy rides.

On top end bikes or anything thats high performance; you not only pay a premium for it, but due to the low volume nature there are added production costs and also you have to pay for the very expensive R&D, which the company want to get back as quickly as possible.

As it turns out the highest of the top end stuff is actually usually sold at a loss becuase when the R&D and tooling costs are factored in the sale price doesn't meet the true cost of each item.

If you can afford £8k on a bike do you think the £250 difference in price for the convenince of getting all the parts at once and already assembled is going to be off putting?

If I was spending £8k on a bike I'd want to spec all the parts myself, rather than have what they decide is best - a quick check of that piccy shows several bits I'd not choose to have. Though I suppose London bankers who want a bike to ride round Richmond Park probably don't want to be bothered by all that.